commonize bc input across strategies; better insure bc ouput is set #9559

gabemontero · 2016-06-24T22:14:27Z

smarterclayton · 2016-06-25T14:10:47Z

Can you paste what the new output looks like?

gabemontero · 2016-06-27T00:06:06Z

OK, here is a "standalone" build config example (I left the pushes to text the way it was, but the associated image_pipeline fix fixed scenarios where it was not showing up. I tweaked the build of.. piece to make them consistent and use the Namer/ResourceName for the istag):

         In project example on server https://example.com:8443

        bc/ruby-22-centos7 docker build of https://github.com/openshift/ruby-hello-world with istag/ruby-22-centos7:latest
          pushes to istag/ruby-hello-world:latest
          not built yet

Here is a svc/dc/bc example (where the multi-line <- connection I again left as is, and only tweaked the source build of .... with line, again leveraging the Namer/ResourceName for the istag):

         In project example on server https://example.com:8443

        svc/sinatra-example-1 - 172.30.17.47:8080
          dc/sinatra-example-1 deploys istag/sinatra-example-1:latest <-
            bc/sinatra-example-1 source build of git://github.com/mfojtik/sinatra-example-1 with docker.io/centos/ruby-22-centos7:latest 
              build #1 running for about a minute (can't push to image)
            deployment #1 waiting on image or update

smarterclayton · 2016-06-27T00:08:15Z

do we need " of "? Does it add anything over:

"docker build git://... with ..."

Is " on " better than " with "?

On Sun, Jun 26, 2016 at 8:06 PM, Gabe Montero [email protected]
wrote:

OK, here is a "standalone" build config example (I left the pushes to
text the way it was, but the associated image_pipeline fix fixed scenarios
where it was not showing up. I tweaked the build of.. piece to make them
consistent and use the Namer/ResourceName for the istag):
     In project example on server https://example.com:8443

    bc/ruby-22-centos7 docker build of https://github.com/openshift/ruby-hello-world with istag/ruby-22-centos7:latest
      pushes to istag/ruby-hello-world:latest
      not built yet
Here is a svc/dc/bc example (where the multi-line <- connection I again
left as is, and only tweaked the source build of .... with line, again
leveraging the Namer/ResourceName for the istag):
     In project example on server https://example.com:8443

    svc/sinatra-example-1 - 172.30.17.47:8080
      dc/sinatra-example-1 deploys istag/sinatra-example-1:latest <-
        bc/sinatra-example-1 source build of git://github.com/mfojtik/sinatra-example-1 with docker.io/centos/ruby-22-centos7:latest
          build #1 running for about a minute (can't push to image)
        deployment #1 waiting on image or update
—
You are receiving this because you commented.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
#9559 (comment),
or mute the thread
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe/ABG_p9FzEZLhkwg8uKQwzMsIoJ-KWageks5qPxPwgaJpZM4I-KqS
.

gabemontero · 2016-06-27T00:13:40Z

On Sun, Jun 26, 2016 at 8:08 PM, Clayton Coleman [email protected]
wrote:

do we need " of "? Does it add anything over:

"docker build git://... with ..."

I think "of" will help newbies make the connection, where as, yes, it seems
unnecessary for the initiated. Plus I think it adds some balance with the
use
of "on" for the next part.

Is " on " better than " with "?

Yes, I'll s/with/on

On Sun, Jun 26, 2016 at 8:06 PM, Gabe Montero [email protected]
wrote:

OK, here is a "standalone" build config example (I left the pushes to
text the way it was, but the associated image_pipeline fix fixed
scenarios
where it was not showing up. I tweaked the build of.. piece to make them
consistent and use the Namer/ResourceName for the istag):

In project example on server https://example.com:8443

bc/ruby-22-centos7 docker build of
https://github.com/openshift/ruby-hello-world with
istag/ruby-22-centos7:latest
pushes to istag/ruby-hello-world:latest
not built yet

Here is a svc/dc/bc example (where the multi-line <- connection I again
left as is, and only tweaked the source build of .... with line, again
leveraging the Namer/ResourceName for the istag):

In project example on server https://example.com:8443

svc/sinatra-example-1 - 172.30.17.47:8080
dc/sinatra-example-1 deploys istag/sinatra-example-1:latest <-
bc/sinatra-example-1 source build of git://
github.com/mfojtik/sinatra-example-1 with
docker.io/centos/ruby-22-centos7:latest
build #1 running for about a minute (can't push to image)
deployment #1 waiting on image or update

—
You are receiving this because you commented.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
#9559 (comment),
or mute the thread
<
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe/ABG_p9FzEZLhkwg8uKQwzMsIoJ-KWageks5qPxPwgaJpZM4I-KqS

.

—
You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
#9559 (comment),
or mute the thread
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe/ADbadNCKz86qHXmAJwLPEdD9e_5dPeytks5qPxR3gaJpZM4I-KqS
.

gabemontero · 2016-06-28T01:53:17Z

@smarterclayton - did I convince you to keep the "of" in "docker build of" ?

smarterclayton · 2016-06-28T04:17:47Z

Space is tight but if you think it reads better I won't object. We need to
make every character count until we add wrapping and flow control to the
status layout engine.

On Jun 27, 2016, at 6:53 PM, Gabe Montero [email protected] wrote:

@smarterclayton https://github.com/smarterclayton - did I convince you to
keep the "of" in "docker build of" ?

—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
#9559 (comment), or mute
the thread
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe/ABG_p7hzd_ZN1snPwZJfjD9icIbyztV5ks5qQH6QgaJpZM4I-KqS
.

gabemontero · 2016-06-28T19:44:05Z

ok, actually, you've convinced me with that last clarification.

docker build of <src repo> is now docker builds <src repo>

Also, the pushes to for standalone builds always seemed a bit inconsistent to me in comparison to the svc->dc->bc chain. I've changed it to ->.

gabemontero · 2016-06-28T19:47:12Z

Oh, I also removed some "no image set.." text that I had added.

@smarterclayton @Kargakis @deads2k agreement on the wording changes? alterations / suggestions on the code changes before posting the merge comment?

0xmichalis · 2016-06-28T19:58:30Z

To be honest, I prefer "pushes to" than the arrow but won't stand against it if all of the rest like it.

smarterclayton · 2016-06-29T03:54:23Z

We did that for a couple of reasons, mostly space, but also because this
is a natural breakpoint in the flow

On Jun 28, 2016, at 12:58 PM, Michail Kargakis [email protected]
wrote:

To be honest, I prefer "pushes to" than the arrow but won't stand against
it if all of the rest like it.

—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
#9559 (comment), or mute
the thread
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe/ABG_p8MfPB4jWM_KOja7eXuoZetHX5hvks5qQXzogaJpZM4I-KqS
.

deads2k · 2016-06-29T12:49:24Z

lgtm

gabemontero · 2016-06-29T21:07:52Z

thanks @deads2k

if I read @smarterclayton 's and @Kargakis 's comments correctly, we have enough consensus for -> replacing pushes to - can one of you three post the merge comment?

thanks

deads2k · 2016-06-30T13:29:03Z

if I read @smarterclayton 's and @Kargakis 's comments correctly, we have enough consensus for -> replacing pushes to - can one of you three post the merge comment?

Just giving them their final warning. :)

[merge]

smarterclayton · 2016-06-30T13:35:58Z

That was not agreement with pushes to.

smarterclayton · 2016-06-30T13:36:30Z

"That" = us "->"

smarterclayton · 2016-06-30T13:37:27Z

but the change in the PR works for me.

openshift-bot · 2016-06-30T13:40:37Z

[Test]ing while waiting on the merge queue

openshift-bot · 2016-06-30T13:42:25Z

Evaluated for origin test up to eb0a20e

gabemontero · 2016-06-30T13:57:29Z

Apologies on the misread - thanks on the sign-off gentlemen

On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 9:37 AM, Clayton Coleman [email protected]
wrote:

but the change in the PR works for me.

—
You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
#9559 (comment),
or mute the thread
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe/ADbadCVNygD-fNRqaMCnZ7AQir6uXwShks5qQ8afgaJpZM4I-KqS
.

openshift-bot · 2016-06-30T15:01:28Z

continuous-integration/openshift-jenkins/test NOTFOUND (https://ci.openshift.redhat.com/jenkins/job/test_pr_origin/5612/)

gabemontero · 2016-06-30T15:03:46Z

Test failed because of ci.openshift hiccup ...

gabemontero · 2016-06-30T18:33:52Z

origin_check had a failure with TestClusterQuotaFuzzer - no use of oc status there ... this is #9638

origin_integration had a failure with the end-to-end runs waiting for the frontend svc to finish coming up (by attempting to curl to the svc endpoint) - this is #9512

gabemontero · 2016-06-30T18:47:11Z

@deads2k - could I get another merge comment, see if we can squeeze past those two flakes ?

smarterclayton · 2016-07-01T00:17:24Z

[merge]

openshift-bot · 2016-07-01T01:45:27Z

continuous-integration/openshift-jenkins/merge SUCCESS (https://ci.openshift.redhat.com/jenkins/job/test_pr_origin/5673/) (Image: devenv-rhel7_4501)

gabemontero · 2016-07-01T12:11:27Z

Both the conformance and integration tests failed with an env hiccup during build: curl: (7) Failed connect to copr.fedorainfracloud.org:443; Connection timed out

bparees · 2016-07-01T12:11:34Z

[merge]

openshift-bot · 2016-07-01T12:15:25Z

Evaluated for origin merge up to eb0a20e

0xmichalis · 2016-07-01T20:38:11Z

but the change in the PR works for me.

Technically, it works for everybody :)

gabemontero force-pushed the issue6357 branch from 96a5104 to 3295f36 Compare June 27, 2016 00:16

commonize bc input across strategies; better insure bc ouput is set

eb0a20e

gabemontero force-pushed the issue6357 branch from 3295f36 to eb0a20e Compare June 28, 2016 19:44

openshift-bot merged commit 889defd into openshift:master Jul 1, 2016

gabemontero deleted the issue6357 branch July 1, 2016 13:39

commonize bc input across strategies; better insure bc ouput is set #9559

commonize bc input across strategies; better insure bc ouput is set #9559

Uh oh!

Conversation

gabemontero commented Jun 24, 2016 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

smarterclayton commented Jun 25, 2016

Uh oh!

gabemontero commented Jun 27, 2016

Uh oh!

smarterclayton commented Jun 27, 2016

Uh oh!

gabemontero commented Jun 27, 2016

Uh oh!

gabemontero commented Jun 28, 2016

Uh oh!

smarterclayton commented Jun 28, 2016

Uh oh!

gabemontero commented Jun 28, 2016

Uh oh!

gabemontero commented Jun 28, 2016

Uh oh!

0xmichalis commented Jun 28, 2016

Uh oh!

smarterclayton commented Jun 29, 2016

Uh oh!

deads2k commented Jun 29, 2016

Uh oh!

gabemontero commented Jun 29, 2016

Uh oh!

deads2k commented Jun 30, 2016

Uh oh!

smarterclayton commented Jun 30, 2016

Uh oh!

smarterclayton commented Jun 30, 2016

Uh oh!

smarterclayton commented Jun 30, 2016

Uh oh!

openshift-bot commented Jun 30, 2016

Uh oh!

openshift-bot commented Jun 30, 2016

Uh oh!

gabemontero commented Jun 30, 2016

Uh oh!

openshift-bot commented Jun 30, 2016

Uh oh!

gabemontero commented Jun 30, 2016

Uh oh!

gabemontero commented Jun 30, 2016 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

gabemontero commented Jun 30, 2016

Uh oh!

smarterclayton commented Jul 1, 2016

Uh oh!

openshift-bot commented Jul 1, 2016 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

gabemontero commented Jul 1, 2016

Uh oh!

bparees commented Jul 1, 2016

Uh oh!

openshift-bot commented Jul 1, 2016

Uh oh!

0xmichalis commented Jul 1, 2016

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

gabemontero commented Jun 24, 2016 •

edited

Loading

gabemontero commented Jun 30, 2016 •

edited

Loading

openshift-bot commented Jul 1, 2016 •

edited

Loading